Tough Stance Is Good

May 04, 1989

Recently, Secretary Jack Kemp of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development agreed to allow Virginia to evict public housing tenants without granting them the normal right to appeal those evictions.

The exemption, which applies solely to Virginia, is aimed at giving authorities a strong weapon in their fight against the increasing drug problem plaguing public housing. That change in procedure has been criticized by groups who sympathize with the tenants it affects. That sympathy is misplaced.

What the exemption does is allow authorities to bypass a federal process under which the tenant being evicted can appeal and thereby gain, at a minimum, 45 to 60 more days of residence in public housing. Under a best case scenario, the eviction would be overturned in the appeal.

The Kemp exemption means tenants are moved out much quicker, a worthwhile result if the tenant is a drug dealer or user. It is the "if" that bothers some attorneys and the American Civil Liberties Union, who contend that due process is being denied.

Critics might have a point if tenants had no recourse whatsoever. But under Virginia law, any public housing tenant still retains the right to appeal eviction through the courts and remain in the housing while the case is pending.

Beyond the question of appeal rights, though, it is important to keep in mind that this process is being used to remove drug dealers and users. Why should taxpayers' money go to pay for housing of people who contribute to the nation's drug problem? How many chances does someone dealing drugs out of their apartment deserve?

The people to sympathize with aren't those being evicted. There is no indication whatsoever that they are being removed without substantial cause. The people who deserve sympathy - and space in the housing for which the public pays - are the tenants who avoid drugs. Kemp's exemption makes sense and we're glad to see that it's being implemented locally.